Information
FOI 15092023-2 – Pseudo-random selection of 50 emails across 50 email addresses
Request
“Using a pseudo-random sampling method (e.g. getting an excel spreadsheet, using a .random() method or something comparable), please select 50 different email addresses operated/used by yourselves and from which emails can be sent and received. After this, please pseudo-randomly select 1 email in each of these inboxes (such as through using an excel spreadsheet, using a .random() method or something comparable to pseudo-randomly generate numbers, constrained by the number of emails in each of the inboxes, which can then be used to retrieve the corresponding email from those inboxes). Then, consider releasing those 50 pseudo-randomly selected emails (in a redacted form or otherwise) in response to this FOI request. When or if you share the (redacted) content associated with those email addresses, consider listing / revealing the email addresses that are already available in the public domain.”
Response
This request is not valid as it does not describe the recorded information requested. If you were to refine your request to specify for example all emails sent by a member of the Office of the Northamptonshire Police, Fire and Crime Commissioner (OPFCC) between XXX date and XXX date, this would be valid, as the parameters of the recorded information being asked for are defined. Equally, if you were to ask for a copy of the first 10 emails sent on a specific day or the last 10 emails sent on a specific day, then this would also be valid, as the recorded information you require is clearly described.
But the request as it stands asks for the OPFCC to choose a random email and provide it. It is not for public authorities to select the information that they provide and therefore our view is that the request is currently not valid by virtue of Section(8)(1)(c) of the Freedom of Information Act requires that a request for information must adequately describe the information sought.
